Newbe Filter Question
- Thread starter z101
- Start date
- Messages
- 3,110
- Name
- Dave
- Edit My Images
- Yes
There are no filters that will make your photos brighter, to do what you want you will either need to use a flash ( most churches will not allow this, but is worth asking) or you will need to buy a faster lens that allows more light in for examaple a 70-200 f2.8 it is the f number that is important, the lower the number the more light it lets in. Hope this helps.
I see it's your first post, so welcome! 
I'm afraid no such filter exists, Dave in post 2 pretty much summed it up. And I'm afraid fast (wide aperture) telephotos are quite pricey. It may be worth considering a 50mm f/1.8 prime lens for low light work. Cheap... both in price and build quality but capable of some excellent results.
I'm afraid no such filter exists, Dave in post 2 pretty much summed it up. And I'm afraid fast (wide aperture) telephotos are quite pricey. It may be worth considering a 50mm f/1.8 prime lens for low light work. Cheap... both in price and build quality but capable of some excellent results.
- Messages
- 276
- Name
- Sharif
- Edit My Images
- Yes
as others have said, there is no such filters that can 'create' more light where theres not a lot of it! Look into the 'Laws of Conservation' and it will give you an explanation of why.
in general Filter are actually designed to do the opposite i.e. reduce the amount on light falling on the sensor.
you will have to invest in a Tripod and a cable shutter release/ use the timer.
I am a newbe to the form but not photography. I have a good understanding except when it comes to filters ect. 
Dave. Firstly thanks for your reply. I have a speedlight 430ex Its fine but I still have to shoot @Iso 800 SS 1/100 using my 90-300mm f4-5 lens. I am getting a nifty fifty but that will involve allot of running around as it is only 50mm.
TheBigYin: Too clumsy, one can move!
Mike, thanks. I am getting a nifty fifty (50mm). It will do till I have enough to get a better lens.
bemcsa: Thanks, the next ISO on my camera is 1600, on SS 1/100 using my F4-5 300mm the quality is terrible! Would noise reduction work?
macro_man: Thanks, tripods are very clumsy, I can see using one as a disaster, but it seems to be my only option other that using just the nifty 50 and using my feet as a zoom!
Any one have another solution? Reflectors?
Can you get an extender to double the 50mm to 100mm. Or whould the quality get too low?
Thanks everyone for the advice so far, looking forward to more!
Dave. Firstly thanks for your reply. I have a speedlight 430ex Its fine but I still have to shoot @Iso 800 SS 1/100 using my 90-300mm f4-5 lens. I am getting a nifty fifty but that will involve allot of running around as it is only 50mm.
TheBigYin: Too clumsy, one can move!
Mike, thanks. I am getting a nifty fifty (50mm). It will do till I have enough to get a better lens.
bemcsa: Thanks, the next ISO on my camera is 1600, on SS 1/100 using my F4-5 300mm the quality is terrible! Would noise reduction work?
macro_man: Thanks, tripods are very clumsy, I can see using one as a disaster, but it seems to be my only option other that using just the nifty 50 and using my feet as a zoom!
Any one have another solution? Reflectors?
Can you get an extender to double the 50mm to 100mm. Or whould the quality get too low?
Thanks everyone for the advice so far, looking forward to more!
- Messages
- 3,110
- Name
- Dave
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I am a newbe to the form but not photography. I have a good understanding except when it comes to filters ect.
Dave. Firstly thanks for your reply. I have a speedlight 430ex Its fine but I still have to shoot @Iso 800 SS 1/100 using my 90-300mm f4-5 lens. I am getting a nifty fifty but that will involve allot of running around as it is only 50mm.
TheBigYin: Too clumsy, one can move!
Mike, thanks. I am getting a nifty fifty (50mm). It will do till I have enough to get a better lens.
bemcsa: Thanks, the next ISO on my camera is 1600, on SS 1/100 using my F4-5 300mm the quality is terrible! Would noise reduction work?
macro_man: Thanks, tripods are very clumsy, I can see using one as a disaster, but it seems to be my only option other that using just the nifty 50 and using my feet as a zoom!
Any one have another solution? Reflectors?
Can you get an extender to double the 50mm to 100mm. Or whould the quality get too low?
Thanks everyone for the advice so far, looking forward to more!
Can you use your flash wirelessly? it may b worth looking into this as by getting the flash closer to the subject you will be able to drop your ISO.
You could use an extender on your 50mm but you would loose 2 stops of light. I do not think reflectors would help. I thinkyour best optionis to use off camera flash, a lot can be achieved with this with a little practice.
- Messages
- 657
- Name
- chris
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Its easy to find out and won't cost you anything.
Take some test pictures at the highest ISO setting and download the Community edition of Noiseware from here (its the one at the bottom of the page). Load some of your noisy images and process. Once converted you can click on the image to flip between the before and after images to see the effect. If you find that its no good, it will only have cost you some time. I found that it is very effective at removing noise, much more so than the noise reduction software that comes with photoshop.
odd jim
Flimsiest Lambresta
- Messages
- 9,208
- Name
- Jim
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I am a newbe to the form but not photography. I have a good understanding except when it comes to filters ect.
Dave. Firstly thanks for your reply. I have a speedlight 430ex Its fine but I still have to shoot @Iso 800 SS 1/100 using my 90-300mm f4-5 lens. I am getting a nifty fifty but that will involve allot of running around as it is only 50mm.
TheBigYin: Too clumsy, one can move!
Mike, thanks. I am getting a nifty fifty (50mm). It will do till I have enough to get a better lens.
bemcsa: Thanks, the next ISO on my camera is 1600, on SS 1/100 using my F4-5 300mm the quality is terrible! Would noise reduction work?
macro_man: Thanks, tripods are very clumsy, I can see using one as a disaster, but it seems to be my only option other that using just the nifty 50 and using my feet as a zoom!
Any one have another solution? Reflectors?
Can you get an extender to double the 50mm to 100mm. Or whould the quality get too low?
Thanks everyone for the advice so far, looking forward to more!
Why are tri-pods clumsy?? You just put it where you want and away you go. TBH for low level light photography a tripod is an absolute must and should be your first consideration!
- Messages
- 3,110
- Name
- Dave
- Edit My Images
- Yes
For a church? I have used one for sports. I'll give it ago.
Also someone was saying about a tripod. That would be good use for after the wedding but during, I would have to take it around with me!
Dave??
- Messages
- 5,000
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Canon extenders also cost a bit of money which could be put towards getting a better lens.
What camera do you have and what lenses?
What camera do you have and what lenses?
odd jim
Flimsiest Lambresta
- Messages
- 9,208
- Name
- Jim
- Edit My Images
- Yes
...just pick up the tripod and move!
TheBigYin
Moderator
- Messages
- 17,024
- Name
- Mark
- Edit My Images
- No
Now, you never said it was for a wedding!! If it's for that, hire a proper lens or two - it's an important event and you can't be buggering around with substandard kit.
- Messages
- 3,110
- Name
- Dave
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I absolutly agree, If you being paid or the only photographer or second shooter? Please if the answer to any of these is yes to any of those do the right thing and hire the kit you need to do the job properly.
- Messages
- 3,110
- Name
- Dave
- Edit My Images
- Yes
You mean the super low light lens:50mm f1.8 won't do??
If it isa wedding you are photographing then the 50 1.8 will not do as your only lens. you will need as a minimum. 50 1.8 24-70 2.8 and 70-200 2.8 plus flash plus back up equipment. Are you the only tog at the wedding, are you being paid? what are the b&g expectations?
- Messages
- 5,881
- Name
- Richard
- Edit My Images
- Yes
- Messages
- 276
- Name
- Sharif
- Edit My Images
- Yes
i essence you have the full range of focal lengths required! you have a long zoom for the candid shots, the wide angles for groups etc. and the 50 for the low light portraits.
what i'll say is that the 400d is fairly loud and can be distracting. you may want to tell your friend this so they expect it during their vows etc.
with regards to the church, my suggestion is a monopod + 800/1600 ISO when using slow lenses indoors.
but you'll have to figure out a combination of support, Iso speed and lens that works best in that particular church with its unique lighting condition.
what i'll say is that the 400d is fairly loud and can be distracting. you may want to tell your friend this so they expect it during their vows etc.
with regards to the church, my suggestion is a monopod + 800/1600 ISO when using slow lenses indoors.
but you'll have to figure out a combination of support, Iso speed and lens that works best in that particular church with its unique lighting condition.
- Messages
- 3,110
- Name
- Dave
- Edit My Images
- Yes
AS you are the only photographer please hire some glass as I suggested, I would also get a flash if you have not got one.
One more question, how long have you had your dslr and what experience have you got. Also what are your friends wanting and are you 100% confident that you will be able to produce the goods?
I know I am asking a lot of questions, but I am only trying to help.
One more question, how long have you had your dslr and what experience have you got. Also what are your friends wanting and are you 100% confident that you will be able to produce the goods?
I know I am asking a lot of questions, but I am only trying to help.
Oooh... This is gonna hurt...
Mate, you need to hire the right kit and to be utterly proficient in its use - that means getting it at least a week beforehand and trying it all out in as many scenarios as you can manage - if possible in the venue you'll be shooting in - I appreciate it's an unpaid task for a friend, but Weddings are the last place you want to be demonstrating your unfamiliarity with equipment or lack of photographic skills... The challenge is to produce, in effect, award-winning phtography in the most challenging of situations: low-light, cramped conditions, with people who'd much rather be at the reception getting drunk at someone else's expense...
Your photographic skills need to be second-nature - that means complete familiarity with equipment and use of available light - the real skill is in communicating your intentions and shepherding people: getting them into the right places to enable the shots you will have already set-up in your mind...I take it you've done all that?
Not a place to be standing in front of a bunch of people going: "errr...why won't this work" or "hmmm...any ideas of who should be in this group?"
Mate, you need to hire the right kit and to be utterly proficient in its use - that means getting it at least a week beforehand and trying it all out in as many scenarios as you can manage - if possible in the venue you'll be shooting in - I appreciate it's an unpaid task for a friend, but Weddings are the last place you want to be demonstrating your unfamiliarity with equipment or lack of photographic skills... The challenge is to produce, in effect, award-winning phtography in the most challenging of situations: low-light, cramped conditions, with people who'd much rather be at the reception getting drunk at someone else's expense...
Your photographic skills need to be second-nature - that means complete familiarity with equipment and use of available light - the real skill is in communicating your intentions and shepherding people: getting them into the right places to enable the shots you will have already set-up in your mind...I take it you've done all that?
Not a place to be standing in front of a bunch of people going: "errr...why won't this work" or "hmmm...any ideas of who should be in this group?"
once again I find myself in complete agreement with Arkady... and getting hold of the right kit, for long enough that it's use is second nature is going to cost!Getting a lens is going to be a little difficult. No hope of renting as there is no shop and all that cost, buying seems to be unlightly. Hmmm tough one. I have fine at arranging ect as I do a little press when they are stuck.
TheBigYin
Moderator
- Messages
- 17,024
- Name
- Mark
- Edit My Images
- No
Getting a lens is going to be a little difficult. No hope of renting as there is no shop and all that cost, buying seems to be unlightly. Hmmm tough one. I have fine at arranging ect as I do a little press when they are stuck.
did you not try the link I gave you earlier ?
Okay - spoonfeed time...
28-70 2.8L here...
70-200 2.8L here...
should be able to hire 'em both for a fortnight for under £200, give you time to work with them a bit, maybe even trial shoot the rehearsal before sending them back (though I'd be in tears if i'd to send such nice glass back
)Ireland, Dave.
TheBigYin: Thanks for that link. I had checked it out but its confusing me. When I go to the delivery method its all UK and NI.
£200 is allot when you take into account I am not being paid. Add P&P on to that and make it 2 weeks. It would never be back in time. Is there really no way I can cope. Is my 90-300mm f4.5 is any good?
Let my feet be the zoom?
TheBigYin: Thanks for that link. I had checked it out but its confusing me. When I go to the delivery method its all UK and NI.
£200 is allot when you take into account I am not being paid. Add P&P on to that and make it 2 weeks. It would never be back in time. Is there really no way I can cope. Is my 90-300mm f4.5 is any good?
Let my feet be the zoom?
A 90-300 will be OK for outdoor shots, I guess...I wouldn't want to rely on it indoors during the service though...
I think your best bet is tell the Bride that you'll happily take some candids of the day and advise her to hire a professional Wedding phot to do the groups and interiors...
- Messages
- 3,110
- Name
- Dave
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I feel that this is probably the best thing to do, this is due to fact that you have not said how long you have had your camera, what experience you have and wether you are confident with what needs to be done and if you can produce the photos that are required. I have shot a friends wedding and trust me it is not easy the first time and spent ages researching and a considreable ammount of money on euipment, I was not paid for it, it was my wedding present to them, I am guessing that it cost me about £700 in buying a spare body and such likes.
- Messages
- 274
- Name
- Mathew
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Always makes me laugh when people on here mention 'doing a wedding for a friend', and everyone on here jumps on them saying you need this lens, that lens, backup bodies, insurance, years of experience, and basically that they're going to burn...
If the B&G want a pro photographer, they should cough up for one. If they want a friend to take a few photos, they just need their expectations managed.
I would say treat yourself to a faster lens. A tripod would be handy as some have suggested but no substitute for a fast lens - if anyone in your picture is moving, they're going to be blurred or soft. A tripod and a fast lens though, that would be good!
If the B&G want a pro photographer, they should cough up for one. If they want a friend to take a few photos, they just need their expectations managed.
I would say treat yourself to a faster lens. A tripod would be handy as some have suggested but no substitute for a fast lens - if anyone in your picture is moving, they're going to be blurred or soft. A tripod and a fast lens though, that would be good!
- Messages
- 3,110
- Name
- Dave
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I understand what you are saying, but and it is a big but it was my best mans wedding that I shot and my friendship is worth far more than I spent, If If I only had 1 body and something happened to that body not only would they not of had the photos of their wedding I would have been devistated and it could of been the end of a long friendship. I do think some go a little ott to whats required but not by lot, I certainly know that if I am asked again PL insurance will be got as I think i was supid for not getting last time. I could not of affording a claim if something had happend.
TheBigYin
Moderator
- Messages
- 17,024
- Name
- Mark
- Edit My Images
- No
Mat, if you look at this thread from the start, the OP asked what filter he needed for shooting in a church - personally, I assumed that he meant some architectural stuff in low light, and recomended a good sturdy tripod and slow shutter speed. It took until post 15 for the key information that it was for shooting a wedding to come out. I can understand that the OP may well not have wanted to mention the "W" word in view of how many of these threads have ended up, but this didn't exactly help in a speedy solution to the problem.
Now, I'm no wedding 'togger - I don't really enjoy shooting anything that can move or answer me back, and wouldn't shoot weddings for a gold pig! I am aware however, that the people who are getting married do care deeply about the shots that they get of the event. As a photographer (pro, keen amature or newbie), If I offer to take shots, I have an obligation to care at least as much about what I turn out. As far as a £200 hire fee being a lot to drop on a wedding that you aren't getting paid for - only you can say how much you wish to spend on a wedding present for them. Personally, I'd treat it as a £100 wedding pressie, and a £100 crash course in photography, which i'd probably find more palatable. I'd also be phoning anyone I knew who I could scrounge a spare body as a backup from.
Shooting moving people indoors, in low light kind of requires decent hardware to produce this kind of quality. If this hardware (and more importantly, the knowledge of how it works, and how hard you can push it) is not in the posession of the OP, then perhaps it's only fair to echo Arkady's suggestion that he restrains his work to shooting some candids.
Steve Smith
Joe
- Messages
- 9,277
- Edit My Images
- No
Seems a bit over the top to me (especially for a one off photographing a friend's wedding). I can never understand what damage you can cause to the public whilst you are just holding a camera up to your eye.
You can be sure that any other guests holding cameras will not have insurance.
Steve.